Watch Cannibal Ferox For Free

You won't be disappointed!

Load of rubbish!!

If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Bad Acting and worse Bad Screenplay

This is an atrociously dire film in every way. The only silver lining was the premise of the story where three student anthropologists enter the Columbian jungles with the naive aim of disproving cannibalism. They come across a couple of adventures who claim to have escaped from a cannibal tribe after they had devoured their colleague. It's the twist in the story that could have saved this film had it been correctly explored and utilised. This, however, isn't the case and there just isn't anything else that makes this a film to watch.Other reviews state the film is so bad that it unintentionally makes you laugh... that wasn't my case. What writer and director Umberto Lenzi gives his viewers is a lesson in the banal, boring, and tedious.From the previously mentioned wasted story issue to the under-acted, over-acted, and wooden performances of the cast to the uninteresting and dreary direction to the worst and insipid locations available, this is a bad film.However, there are a few issues which did earn it the rating I gave. I did like the twist in the tale which wasn't fully envisioned. There were actual moments when the cast got serious and wasn't too bad in their roles. Even Giovanni Lombardo Radice, who was mostly ludicrously over-the-top, actually had a couple of moments where he was menacing and believable. Then there was the glorious gorefest of the special effects, though these are expected to be bad, they never fail to entertain; the scene of the penis extraction brought a wince to my face. However, even the effects aren't without their errors. The way they are filmed is so matter-of-fact that they lose their shock value.Then, of course, there's the animal cruelty as you are witness to the killing of a turtle and a wild boar. I do hope these animals were to be used as sustenance and were subsequently eaten. I must admit to not liking the thought of them being killed and then discarded for entertainment's sake, as these scenes were not required for the story.This is not the best cannibal film: For the best story and acting, watch Cannibal Holocaust For an interesting twist on the genre, better story and acting, try Cannibal Apocalypse For the best jungle location, I suggest you watch The Man From Deep RiverThough, I will say I do not find the cannibal genre that interesting and even though these are better than Ferox they're still not brilliant.

Three friends out to disprove cannibalism meet two men on the run who tortured and enslaved a cannibal tribe to find emeralds, and now the tribe is out for revenge.Of the Italian cannibal films, this is the first one I ever saw. It did not offend me as it does many people, but it certainly intrigued me. Was the film defensible? Were the acts of animal violence cruel, or were they natural? And could they be explained away by this being a very thin metaphor for European colonialism? I do tend to think most of the animal violence is not as bad as many think. It may seem cruel, but if the natives truly eat the animals, how is this different than what we (Americans) do to pigs and cows? For all practical purposes, there is no difference.The film itself is decent, though not great. The dubbing is rather silly at times, and the soundtrack could use a few more tracks. We hear the same musical cue over and over. But for the sort of low-budget stuff Lenzi was pumping out, this may be among his better works.

This is pretty much a carbon copy of "Cannibal Holocaust" with all the needed gore and violence, disgusting elements and shocking moments but it's not a great film like that was. It's almost the same film except for some notable changes, some better, others not so much. A good film anyway. Thoughtful insights were left out to present once again people from developed nations getting eaten by people of the so-called uncivilized nations."Cannibal Ferox" was one of many films of that ongoing success of cannibal films made in the 80's that now are a cult among fans over the world and still banned in some countries due to its hardcore violence and cruelty against animals killed on screen (this has less scenes than Deodato's infamous classic but they still impress and they're completely pointless to the movie's context). You can say it's a terrifying picture even with some funny and ridiculous dialogs and funny moments as well (but I was able to see people laughing when one of the guys had part of his head cut off, we never know people's taste anyway). The weakest plot devices from "Cannibal Holocaust" such as no use of night scenes (that is what makes horror always scary and I can't understand how that movie survived without that) and the amazingly beautiful music of Riz Ortolani (so beautiful that is distractive) are improved here. So, there's night scenes and the music plays its part in haunting us. But the intelligence and the criticism made by that classic is absent here, but quite disguised in form of a special thesis one of the main characters has to do about the cannibal societies and how they act, so dumb.I liked it despite some depressive parts - that tied animal eaten by the snake, scene made to cause impact on viewers but that has no connection with the story - and the pathetic acting by the cast (but Robert Kerman saves the film). Fans of the genre will be delighted with it. 9/10

The film begins with the murder of a drug addict in an unknown apartment by some gangsters looking for a man named Mike Logan. As the police begin their investigation into the shooting, the action relocates to the Paraguayan jungle, where two students, Gloria (Lorraine De Selle) and Rudy (Danilo Mattei), and one tag-along Pat (Zora Kerova) are making their way into the heart of the jungle looking for native tribes who have been accused of cannibalism. Gloria is out to disprove the claims of cannibalism for her dissertation, and after they come across two mangled bodies of tribesmen, they also come across Mike Logan carrying his injured partner Joe (Walter Lucchini), who both claim to have been attacked by savage cannibals.Between 1977 and 1981 there was a huge boom in cannibal films. They boasted exotic locations, horrific gore, real animal killings, and the threat of the unknown in the primitive tribes. It was Ferox's director Umberto Lenzi who kick-started the sub-genre with Deep River Savages in 1972, but they only really hit their stride in 1977, when the Grindhouse theatres were at their most popular. The cannibal genre died out pretty quickly, thankfully, as they represent everything that is ugly about the horror genre, and Cannibal Ferox, possibly the second most notorious after Cannibal Holocaust, is no exception.The gore and violence is by no means convincing, or even disturbing, but it is clear from the off that the film's sole purpose is to be more repulsive than anything else before it. Multiple cocks are hacked off (and one is eaten - yummy), a woman is lifted into the air with fish- hooks through the breasts, there is an eye-gouging, and of course, no cannibal film would be complete without a bit of the ol' brain eating. This is all well and good and what can be expected from an Italian exploitation film at the height of the nasties era, but the animal killings are simply needless.I always found myself defending Cannibal Holocaust for the animal cruelty, as that is a genuinely good film, and the horrific animal scenes really do add to the horrible and deeply unsettling atmosphere. But after seeing Ferox, I realised there is really no excuse for it. Regardless of the film's quality, there is no place for the pointless killing of animals. Radice refused to wield the knife during the pig- killing scene, and in the DVD commentary, director Lenzi said 'Robert De Niro would have done it!', to which Radice replied 'Robert De Niro would have told you to f**k off!'Anyway, the film really is pretty damn awful. Why the action keeps shifting back to New York is anyone's guess. Mike is a wanted drug pusher that legged it off to Paraguay in search of cocaine and a fortune in gemstones, but surely knowing this is enough? There is a rescue attempt near the end that looks like joining the two stems together, but nothing comes of it. It seems to be there only to add a few more minutes onto the running time, allowing the film to render itself a feature. As you would expect, the acting/script/story is guff, but the strange thing is the moral message it seems to be putting out. When it revealed that Mike was lying and it was in fact him that attacked the tribe (shock horror), it seems to be a 'don't judge a book by it's cover' type message. But when the tribe acts out their revenge, they revel in the torturing.Well anyway, the real torture victim was me, who had to sit through this. There's a few more cannibal films to get through for the nasties project (maybe I'll leave them to Marc), and although I'll welcome (if that's the right word) another viewing of Cannibal Holocaust, I have to say that I would be happy not to have to sit through another cannibal film. And there's always the Mondo sub-genre I suppose!www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com